AK-47 said:
For reasons totally unrelated to police overtime, and thus, completely irrelevant to this conversation.
Toronto cops make mad loot writing tickets. Still think the system isn't corrupt?
- Thread starter Mao Tse Tongue
- Start date
For reasons totally unrelated to police overtime, and thus, completely irrelevant to this conversation.
Your point made no sense. NHL Salary caps and the amount of overtime a few TPS members make are not similar at all.AK-47 said:
You do apparently…with all your inane commentsAK-47 said:
No you don’t. I can tell by your comments you are nothing more than an orange painted island-living wannabeToronto socialist. You’d rather take guns away from cops and give more money to the homeless, or to be truthful more money for the Pride parade so you and your roided-upgym buddies can go out in the open with your assless chaps.AK-47 said:
We obviously agree on the subject at hand cheif, but I have to say, I figured Mr. Assualt Weapon for a gun totin', "less government" right winger (from an American perspective).masterchief said:
And I suppose a Dunce Cap is strikingly similar to a Salary Cap because they both have the word "Cap" in them.AK-47 said:
I figured if he keeps erroneously calling me a cop.......I'd go one better.viking1965 said:
See the “less government” is blown away by his need to have salaries legislated.
I cannot say much for personal reasons, but for the last few months I have gotten a very deep education from cops, insurance companies, ticket fighting companies and senior level bureacrats about the level of corruption built into the system.masterchief said:
Cops have quotas to begin with that they must meet. This could be argued keeps law and order in place. But when you reward police personally for writing tickets, it is prone to corruption plain and simple.
Good cops I have talked with, especially those that are financially secure and do not need extra money, frown on cops that write endless tickets without any discretion and in questionable circumstances. You know why? It makes their job harder and degrades public confidence in cops. It's a loop.
As someone pointed out, cops write questionable tickets BECAUSE THEY KNOW PEOPLE WILL FIGHT, ching a ling. They also do things like charge two different parties at the scene of an accident because they double up their court times and then their earnings, even if there is only one party at fault at the scene. This is common knowledge.
Insurance companies actually know this and build this into their fault charts, which is why insurance companies will tell you they often ignore accident reports when determining fault as they know officers are gaming the system to their own benefit. Too many cases where drivers clearly not at fault are charged with vague--and beatable--offenses at the scene, which the driver is bound to fight---ching ching ching for the officer.
There is much more that I would love to say but cannot, but trust me when I tell you that the system is corrupt and does not serve the public. And to those that say that every asshole who fights a ticket destroys the system, it's the other way around: people fight because the cops are writing tickets whether you broke the law or not. Not all cops, but enough.
I appreciate your candor and situation. So let’s treat this as a proper intellectual discussion…unlike some posters with their wacky ideas.Mao Tse Tongue said:
Cops have quotas to begin with that they must meet. This could be argued keeps law and order in place. But when you reward police personally for writing tickets, it is prone to corruption plain and simple.
I agree. But what’s wrong with a quota?
And before I get attacked let’s get this right. The officers that predominantly give out tickets are officers assigned to a traffic detail. Not all cops give out tickets, I’ve met enough front-line response officers that haven’t held a ticket book in years
I mean what other method is there to ensure that someone is sent out to do their job went direct supervision is not possible. Trust me there would be a bigger outcry if it was discovered that these officers just sat in a cruiser all day and never did the job they were assigned to.
Enough of that though…..tickets are given out if the operator of a vehicle has violated the law. They’re not given out for the wrong colour of car, or because it’s a Tuesday. If people didn’t speed, drive recklessly or break the law….there’d be no tickets to give out.
Sure but in every job, every organization there are a few bad apples. Why is no one blaming the crown for making deals outside of the court at the last minute which negates the need for the office to even be there anymore.Mao Tse Tongue said:
Possibly, but when you realize that the only reason the office is called in to testify is because the defendant has asked for them, you then have to wonder why. (You don’t need the officer there for your case, usually it’s better if they are not there)Mao Tse Tongue said:
And let’s be honest…most people tick off that box thinking the old wives tale that the officer won’t show up and they’ll get off scott free. Well those days are long gone, and because too many officers never showed up , they’ve been ordered too by legislation.
So the fault is not only with the officer in this scenario but of the defendant as well.
Of course not, but spend a day in traffic court and see how many people are there who are totally guilty. They aren’t there to prove their innocence, but to argue that due to thier own ignorance or hubris that the law somehow shouldn’t apply to them.Mao Tse Tongue said:
(Want a better time…..go sit in parking court and listen to the mouthbreathers there try to explain how its ok to park infront of a hydrant)
And let’s be honest…it all comes down to the fact that they committed some sort of infraction to have receive the ticket.
The real fault in the system then falls on everyone…..not just the police officer.
No-one disputes that. We are merely talking about a change in the way they are compensated for this time, no one ist alking about eliminating their compensation. They would move to a flat rate of compensation for court time and away from an hourly model. Same total target pay.viking1965 said:
Says who? I say that is a flawed approach: It is too hard to tell the difference between an officer who is writing bogus tickets and an officer who made a few honest mistakes.
So long as the conflict of interest remains you will have the POSSIBILITY that officers are taking advantage of any ambiguity to further their own interests rather than the public interest.
The conflict of interest must be eliminated. You can't eliminate it simply by punishing people who succumb to it.
No-one is preventing ANYONE from being compensated. I get the feeling you aren't actually reading my posts.
That does not eliminate the conflict of interest. That attempts to react to the existence of a conflict of interst, as does the suggestion that officers should be fired.masterchief said:
In practice it will be impossible in most cases to tell whether a ticket was egregiously bogus or whether it was simply an honest mistake by a hard working officer.
No solution based on oversight and discipline will be effective in the face of inappropriate incentives.
I agree….but what I was saying was the levels of oversight due minimize any conflicts of interest. There is never any foolproof method to stop corruption or an abuse of the system.fuji said:
Well the issue of the ticket being analyzed should be the job of the crown attorney before the trail happens. If there was a step like that in the early stages of the process (much like pre-trial discovery in major cases) the need sometimes for officers to even appear in court to testify would be eliminated. Right now the fact that this is all done on the day of the trial is too late.
I mean we could look at better ones like every time there is a municipal election Howard Moscoe cashes in since his lawn sign manufacturing business is the one every city counselor uses. Or the fact that city counselors have family members working in departments they oversee.
Nothing. Reread what I wrote.masterchief said:
The quota system works, with some minor flaws. But when you start rewarding cops MONETARILY for writing extra tickets by virtue of court time, etc., it crosses over to corruption, and it is indeed happening. It's not a case of a few bad apples, but a loophole that many officers are using to increase their pay at the expense of public trust and confidence in the force. Remember that the thin blue line only exists as long as people feel cops are fair and reasonable, and exercise discretion.
Again I would love to litter this thread with specific examples which would blow people's mind, but I can't for discretionary reasons. Suffice it to say that when other institutions have built in stop gaps against these excesses it tell you it's more than a few bad apples but a systemic problem.
masterchief said:
I do believe that every business, private and public sector have quota systems to measure employee effectiveness, why would the Police Services be any different?
What everybody seems to forget here is that if you buy into the theory that tickets are being written only to generate revenue not good public policy, would have to concede that government that receives the revenue generated by these tickets benefits at a much greater rate than extra money that is paid for the officers to appear in court. Believe me if that wasn't the case, none of these so called overtime benefits would be paid. Again you also have no way of knowing what the overtime for the top paid LEOs was actually for the writing of traffic tickets since this information is not disclosed. All that is disclosed is the total salary paid. There are a number of reasons overtime is paid to LEOs that have nothing to do with traffic tickets. Some people here are just making wild assumptions.
If you are truly upset by the practice of quotas for traffic tickets then your anger should be directed at the Police Services board or the City Council, not the individual LEO.
sean
Guess you didn't actually read to the end of the thread huh? Quotas are not the problem.seaniam said:
Mao Tse Tongue said:
Well if you buy your argument then quotas would have to be a problem despite anything you have added that says it doesn't. Clearly if you buy that the officer in question gained all this over time writing traffic tickets, he would have had to justify this to his superiors as meeting or exceeding quotas set for his job.
It's nice to be such a smart ass huh Mao. Clearly you didn't read the article you put up in the first place. All this newspaper article reported was the number of officers who were getting 100K plus is increasing, that it didn't include pay duties, and it identified the officer who was paid the most. While the article seems to link this officer directly to the traffic tickets, it never really definitively say that this is what happened. All it said Mao was that most of the charges laid are traffic related and like the simple minded individual you seem to be you jumped to the conclusion the reporter wanted you to do. Are you really that naive, perhaps we should get the same reporter to suggest to you that it might not be a bad idea to jump off a 50 story building because an angel might catch you.
The bottom line is, we do not know for sure how this overtime was incurred by the identified officer, for all we know he could have been the first Officer on the scene at the Jane Creba shooting and spent the last ten months at that trial. Overtime is not identified, the officer in question didn't talk to the reporter as is custom, nor has the Police Services commented on it.
You also made an issue out of paid duties, why I have no idea since this is paid by private funds.
You took a big leap and are getting all bent out of shape over a non issue.
Again if you are truly concerned about the number of traffic tickets being written in the City, don't go after the cops that are instructed to do it, go after the fools in the Mayor's office who see this as an important source of revenue.
sean
So you personally know numerous individuals from each of these "walks of life"? Or are you an investigative reporter?Mao Tse Tongue said:
If the problem is as "systemic" as you would have us believe, then why does the article really only concentrate on a pair of obviously "extreme" anecdotal examples of abuse?
I'm not going to waste any more energy on this. It's your system as much as mine. Next time you get hit by a cop gaming the system on a bogus charge or ticket, you'll remember me fondly. The system has serious loopholes that the cops are playing like a fiddle. And not just a few.viking1965 said:
Adios.
